Review The Last Film You Saw ~ Thread 3
- Thread starter Tinkerbell
- Start date
- Status
No I hate watching parts of movies. But by the time I figured out Halloween isn't worth watching, the first part of Saw 2 was done. 
My best friend says Saw 3 is definitely worth watching. Well, I think I'm done with Saw. Kthxbye.
It's so typical. They screw up horror movies by writing a second and a third and a fourth and a one billionth part. The first one is always the best.
My best friend says Saw 3 is definitely worth watching. Well, I think I'm done with Saw. Kthxbye.It's so typical. They screw up horror movies by writing a second and a third and a fourth and a one billionth part. The first one is always the best.
sandersidle
Captain
That's so true. I loved Saw 1. Saw 2 was good too but then it just gets rediculous.
So... in the newest Saw, the bad guy dies doesn't he? And then I saw in a promo that he's apparently not dead for the one coming out. I find that stupid, tbh. I thought it was finally over but they keep milking it and stretching it out. Oh well, they already ruined a good movie.
Time for one of Katie's crappy reviews. I saw Man On Fire (again). I love it. One of my favourite movies. Dakota Fanning never fails to amaze me. I can't imagine being her age (or mine) and acting the way she can. The movie is a good balance of suspence/horror/thriller. You can't go wrong with that in my book because I love movies like that.
cathwillows
CSI Level Three
Yep, same here! I didn't even watch Saw 3 because I thought it would be lame. But then my friend got me to go with her to see the latest Saw movie.
sandersidle said:
So... in the newest Saw, the bad guy dies doesn't he? And then I saw in a promo that he's apparently not dead for the one coming out. I find that stupid, tbh. I thought it was finally over but they keep milking it and stretching it out. Oh well, they already ruined a good movie.
Right, the bad guy, John Kramer, died in Saw III and they show his autopsy in the beginning of Saw IV. And of course he was able to find someone else who would go on with his brutal game. There are also some flashbacks of him and his wife, they kinda explain how he became what he is.
Brilliant movie, but yes, very violent. Rather like 'Fargo', it was also full of black humour, which meant you didn't know whether to laugh, cry or grimace at times (all 3 probably). I hope it gets the recognition it deserves at the Oscars. Javier Bardem looked like he was in The Monkees with that haircut!
Also, Tommy Lee Jones <3.
Missing
Pathologist
Jumper
The guy on the radio was right to give it 1 waffle out of 5. It sucked and basically had no plot. Yeah it is a cool idea to be able to "jump" to anywhere you want to but they didn't really do anything with the character, they didn't even make him a hero. He was just a guy. Very dissapointing.
The guy on the radio was right to give it 1 waffle out of 5. It sucked and basically had no plot. Yeah it is a cool idea to be able to "jump" to anywhere you want to but they didn't really do anything with the character, they didn't even make him a hero. He was just a guy. Very dissapointing.
allmaple
Judge
the first one was by far the best, but ill keep watching them because i want to know how the heck they can keep going! :lol: havent gotten around to seeing 4 yet, ive heard there is going to be at least 6
the last movie i saw was 'because i said so'. i know this got horrible reviews, i think it was called the worst movie of 2007, but i love it! a very cute romantic comedy. yes the acting was a little off in some scenes, but whatever. im not expecting oscar worthy performances in a romcom. and predictable? of course! thats why we watch these movies, because it always turns out the way you want it too. the storyline is pretty cute, and one of the love interests is so adorable. if you want a cute little chick flick, this is it. i watched it with my mom, because she always says 'because i said so!' to me
Gaelen
Coroner
I Am Legend
I have to say that I have mixed feelings about this movie. First of all, the sets were great (empty New York? Playing golf on USAF machines? madness!) and Will Smith's performance was amazing.
It's the plot where things start going downhill. It had such amazing potential and then the movie suddenly ends. A little anticlimatic, felt that they could have done so much better in the end.
I have to say that I have mixed feelings about this movie. First of all, the sets were great (empty New York? Playing golf on USAF machines? madness!) and Will Smith's performance was amazing.
It's the plot where things start going downhill. It had such amazing potential and then the movie suddenly ends. A little anticlimatic, felt that they could have done so much better in the end.
At last, I was able to watch Juno. I totally fell in love with this movie. I must say that it is indeed brilliant and it's one of the smartest comedy I have evr watched. Ellen Page did great in playing Juno's role. Congratualtions to her nomination in the Academy. And it was just an excellent cast. It was just sad that it didn't win Best Picture though.
I totally fell in love with this movie. I must say that it is indeed brilliant and it's one of the smartest comedy I have evr watched. Ellen Page did great in playing Juno's role. Congratualtions to her nomination in the Academy. And it was just an excellent cast. It was just sad that it didn't win Best Picture though. 
MiamiDade
Pathologist
I thought 'No Country For Old Men' was an excellent movie too. Congratulations to Javier Bardem and the Coen brothers for their Oscar wins last night. Very deserving winners.Lucy said:
Brilliant movie, but yes, very violent. Rather like 'Fargo', it was also full of black humour, which meant you didn't know whether to laugh, cry or grimace at times (all 3 probably). I hope it gets the recognition it deserves at the Oscars. Javier Bardem looked like he was in The Monkees with that haircut!
Also, Tommy Lee Jones <3.
Daquien
Coroner
^^So happy Javier Bardem won the Oscar *does happy dance* (btw, the 4 actors who won the Oscar this year were European, that's cool).
And I agree with Lucy about reminding me "Fargo", the desolated landscape (the frozen mid-west in "Fargo" and the border between Texas and México in "No Country for Old Men") and a random guy comitting a crime thinking he's being smart and then facing terrible consequences.
Michael Clayton.
Interesting movie and having George Clooney on screen most of the time is a plus. :devil:
Tilda Swinton won the Oscar as the evil, insecure coorporation director.
(btw, the 4 actors who won the Oscar this year were European, that's cool).And I agree with Lucy about reminding me "Fargo", the desolated landscape (the frozen mid-west in "Fargo" and the border between Texas and México in "No Country for Old Men") and a random guy comitting a crime thinking he's being smart and then facing terrible consequences.
Michael Clayton.
Interesting movie and having George Clooney on screen most of the time is a plus. :devil:
Tilda Swinton won the Oscar as the evil, insecure coorporation director.
allmaple
Judge
30 days of night
so very, very disappointing! i thought this had gotten fair reviews for the genre, but i guess i was wrong. the acting was beyond bad (and you expect less than superb acting in horror movies anyway) and there was nothing scary about it. i was down right bored.
they had the vampires speaking some other language, which was kind of cheesey. plus i dont expect to be reading subtitles in a horror movie. they also werent frightening at all. you didnt really see much of the attacks, so again no scares going on there. even when the vampires jumped out at people, you saw their shadows moving around in the background before it happened.
the ending was just plain stupid, i dont know how else to describe it! they could have done so much better with what they had to work with (alaskan town that goes into darkness for 30 days in the winter). not sure if the comic book is as lame as the movie, but this one is certainly not worth the time if you are looking for a good scare.
so very, very disappointing! i thought this had gotten fair reviews for the genre, but i guess i was wrong. the acting was beyond bad (and you expect less than superb acting in horror movies anyway) and there was nothing scary about it. i was down right bored.
they had the vampires speaking some other language, which was kind of cheesey. plus i dont expect to be reading subtitles in a horror movie. they also werent frightening at all. you didnt really see much of the attacks, so again no scares going on there. even when the vampires jumped out at people, you saw their shadows moving around in the background before it happened.
the ending was just plain stupid, i dont know how else to describe it! they could have done so much better with what they had to work with (alaskan town that goes into darkness for 30 days in the winter). not sure if the comic book is as lame as the movie, but this one is certainly not worth the time if you are looking for a good scare.
cathwillows
CSI Level Three
^ Some of my friends said they liked the movie and thought it was scary...well I guess I'll have to watch it myself to be sure
In good Company
I think it wasn't a very good movie and I only watched it because Marg Helgenberger was in it
I thought it would be funnier. There wasn't much of a storyline I think:
But I thought Topher Grace was kinda hot :lol:
In good Company
I think it wasn't a very good movie and I only watched it because Marg Helgenberger was in it
I thought it would be funnier. There wasn't much of a storyline I think:
Company fuses with another company, people get fired, Dennis Quaid gets a new boss who is younger than him, boss starts an affair with Dennis' daughter, gets punched for that and then Dennis gets his old job back... *yawns*
- Status